Question 1: Say the Boston Celtics lost to an Orlando Magic team with no players on it. It was… (choose one response)
- …a statistical fluke!
- …pathetic!
- …deeply concerning and justification for widespread alarm — light the lantern in Old North Church!
- …perfectly normal. All teams lose occasionally.
Most of the time, option 1 and 4 are reasonably and measured responses. Occasionally you have to fire up answer 2, like when Boston blows a game at full strength to the Anthony Davis-LeBron Jamesless Los Angeles Lakers, and I really try to avoid going full Paul Revere with option 3. We try to keep it simple and rational around here (many people chuckle behind the curtain).
Tonight’s loss, though, necessitates a closer look. The Magic were playing with practically nobody, loses all three of Mo Wagner, Paolo Banchero and Franz Wagner to injury and starting two players named Tristan Da Silva and Trevelin Queen. The Celtics were at full strength apart from one, super-seriously-important caveat: a last-second Jayson Tatum absence due to an illness.
These types of things have unmeasurable impact on NBA games: on one hand, you could say the Celtics got smacked in the face by a freak-Tatum sickness pregame and were unable to adjust their game plan; on the other hand, the Celtics have so much talent and are professional NBA players, so that probably should not have mattered.
And it didn’t matter for the first half. The Celtics were assertive, dominant and played bigger. But the Tatum absence was felt big-time down the stretch, with Boston going full I-got-this mode with isolation and no passing whatsoever dragging the Celtics down the pit of mediocrity. The Magic proceeded to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and ascended to the same level of mediocrity, giving themselves a chance against this whatever Celtics performance.
I’m not mad. I’m just disappointed. It could have and should have been better, but Boston played themselves right into a funk and were unable to dance out of it. The late-game execution was everything this team used to struggle with, and underscored how important Tatum has become for this team. Everything runs through him in the clutch, and the Celtics are liable to break down without him. It’s not an excuse, but it is a reasonable explanation.
If you’re tempted to smash option 1 and say it was a statistical fluke — the Celtics were 8-32 from three, which is… not exactly great — I would advise against that. Boston played themselves out of the game schematically, not just numerically. There was no movement, no intentionality and nobody was taking and making threes confidently. On paper, it makes sense, but it didn’t pass the eye test. The Celtics’ failure couldn’t be explained with “oh, just make one!”; it was deeper than that.
The Payton Pritchard quotient is also something to actively monitor. He struggled to score all night, notching a team-low -12 and sitting out the stretch even when the Celtics needed a bucket, something he’s usually great at. There seems to be a developing correlation between Pritchard playing well and the Celtics playing well, so let’s keep an eye on that one as we get closer to the playoffs.
Final answer? I’ll go for a mix of 3 and 4. These losses happen, and I am not nearly as freaked out by them as I would have been pre-Banner 18. But I’m guessing the Celtics players were also not as freaked out, which paradoxically freaks me out a bit more. They’re not going to have the same desperation available, so motivation to not do the stand-around-and-iso-ball thing will have to be found elsewhere.
Question 2 is… from where?
 may shock you.){kind=link}